Chris Matthews on Ryan: Hey, this guy could be worse than Dan Quayle

posted at 9:21 pm on August 14, 2012 by Allahpundit

Via Newsbusters, concern-trolling so lazy that it doesn’t make sense even on its own terms. His point, per this morning’s Politico piece on “the Republican Party’s Bedwetter Caucus,” is that Ryan could be poison for the GOP. Okay, then … why cite Quayle? Bush 41 won in a landslide, remember? When push came to shove, for all the jokes made about him, Quayle wasn’t a drag on the ticket. For that matter, why cite Tom Eagleton? How many states would McGovern have lost if the Eagleton thing had never happened? 48 instead of 49? If anything, he and Quayle stand for the proposition that a controversial VP pick just doesn’t matter much to the nominee’s chances.

Beyond that, you can practically see the lightbulb over his head go off as he tries to jumpstart a narrative that choosing Ryan undercuts Romney’s business record specifically. What kind of CEO, after all, would bet his business on such a risky investment? Possible answer: A CEO whose “business” was already struggling and who spotted a chance for a high reward in return for assuming a greater-than-anticipated risk. Ask yourself, how confident would you have felt about Romney’s chances if he had gone the safe route and chosen Pawlenty or Portman? Ryan’s a better retail politician than either of them and he brings a sense of purpose to the ticket that would have been utterly lacking otherwise. Without him, the entire remainder of the campaign would have been an exercise in killing time until election day and then hoping there are enough “anybody but Obama” votes floating around out there to deliver victory. That doesn’t feel like a winning dynamic. Ryan brings huge liabilities but huge assets too, and greatly boosts Romney’s chances of having a meaningful presidency. Why not roll the dice?

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

I work just outside the lion’s den. I’m a high school teacher in south suburban Chicago, in Jesse Jackson’s Jr’s congressional district. At my school/workplace, Phase One is complete. Obama has now officially lost the Math department (which, oddly enough, is my department). English and Arts are still holding, but Science is waffling and Social Studies is beginning to crack (particularly US History and Economics). Will begin Phase Two shortly.

Hey there Chrissy with the warm tingly stream running down your leg. When we wake up after Nov 6th and find out that Romney/Ruan won all 50 states and then they interview you and Obama and Obama says, but I won the other 7 states. I would keep quiet about Quayle.

This!!! And why Romney is an accomplished venture capitalist. While he was not my first or even third choice, his pick of Ryan shows true grit and a smart move, not on the craps table, mind you, but on the chess board.

The race might well have been won this past weekend.

TXUS on August 14, 2012 at 10:04 PM

I agree, and it’s not merely a leap of faith to believe this. There is empirical evidence in Mitt Romney’s record to suggest that he is both intelligent enough and methodical enough to plan out a winning strategy many moves in advance.

Dude is sounding desparate. The Quayle meme ain’t going to stick especially when you have Vice President Gaffemaster outgaffing Quayle himself. Their only hope is dig up some hidden dirt from Ryan’s past. I’m thinking October surprise. Unless the floor starts to fall out from under President Wonderful, and even a D +20 poll can’t make up the gap, then they’ll roll it out right away.

Worse than Quayle? He may be right, seeing it from his position there on the Democrat cheerleader junior varsity. Could be much worse. Quayle only had one term. Matthews is looking at two terms of Ryan as VP, then perhaps two terms as prez.

Well put. The edifice is like a Mt Rushmore-style monument with the heads of FDR, JFK and Harry Truman. In the fourth spot where all other habitual, hereditary Democrats have Bill Clinton, Matthews has Tip O’Neill.

The Dems are scared that Ryan is the Hope and Change.
Obama was the poser, the fraud.

albill on August 15, 2012 at 6:46 AM

Paul Ryan wants a lean US government with targeted benefits for those least able to take care of themselves and the competitiveness to get America back to work.

Barack Obama wants an America where the US government is the referee and the arbiter of everything from how much of all our money to gift his chosen businesses with to what kind of lettuce your child has to eat at school lunch.

Make no mistake, the Dems are scared of both Romney and Ryan. And the fact that they’ve had no traction with the smear job they have done in lieu of substance they have attempted so far.

Happy Nomad on August 15, 2012 at 7:24 AM

The Democrats understand they have failed with this approach and they already have a contingency in place: Smear harder.
As for Chrissy Legtingles…sometimes on my evening walks I have to step over or around a puddle of Matthews in the middle of the sidewalk. Man, I hate that.

The Democrats understand they have failed with this approach and they already have a contingency in place: Smear harder.

Extrafishy on August 15, 2012 at 7:33 AM

What else do they have? They can’t run on their record. Romney/Ryan are right that it is Obama that is looking to loot Medicare and put current recipients on the street as a way of paying down Obamacare. The economy has not improved. So….. We double down on comments about that one trip where Seamus the dog rode on the roof of the Romney stationwagon.

Fill me in AP. I must have missed something. What are these huge liabilities? I wasn’t a Ry an supporter. I do thinkthat it is a risk having an entire ticket from an econmically failed part of the country, but on a personal basis, what the heck are you talking about?

It’s inevitable that Matthews would be blind to Ryan’s virtues because Matthews doesn’t even pretend to understand federal finances. He sees all budget debates in terms of rhetorical positioning — big guy, little guy, etc. He has no clue as to what current policies are running the debt into the stratosphere.

I remember in 2008 Fred Thompson came out with a proposal to re-index the initial Social Security benefit level to price growth rather than wage growth, which would go a long way toward restoring program solvency. That night Matthews led a panel discussion in which he misinterpreted the proposal as an adjustment to the Social Security COLA, a different issue entirely. The two proposals were completely different in their fiscal effects and in who they would affect. Matthews and his panelists couldn’t be bothered to even understand them — he just put it in his “monkeying with Social Security” pigeonhole and teed off on it.

There’s no way a guy like this is going to understand Ryan, whose entire public career is built on avoiding the coming fiscal meltdown.

other posters may not understand how important your post is. But this is real life, if they begin to lose the most staunch, even shake the foundation of Chicago most liberal, you have to realize how the less entrenched are thinking.
I see it as I drive through the “black” neighborhoods, last election, signs everywhere, banners, citizen meetings, and daily marches in support of Obama, it was over the top…now, the only bumper stickers on those cars are left over from 4 years ago, and no signs, no banners and certainly no marches…it is so obvious the disappointment and the reality.

Even Ryan’s allegedly notorious extreme radical budget does not balance the federal budget for 10-20 years depending on projected economic growth.

The Dems have no proposal at all to balance the budget and apparently do not care about it. The Democratic Party has become completely irresponsible about the future fiscal and economic health of the nation. But Ryan is a risky pick because he proposed a budget that does not balance the budget for about 15 years, while the President of the US proposed a budget that never balances the budget?

This is insane.

Have we really become a nation of irresponsible moronic math challenged children who believe this can go on indefinitely without dire and disastrous consequences?

This is what we want liberals to think…so out of touch with the voting public that they tune them out.

As the shrill became louder regarding Ronald Reagan, people begin tuning out the journalist, and began listening to Reagan.

Every one states that Reagan “went to the people” for his message, and that is partly right, but because they were not getting the message from the MSM…so it will be with this ticket.

It takes a little longer, but the “curing” process is more lasting. The more Chrissie and others whine go over the top in denouncing the Republican’s, the more the people will turn to Romney/Ryan for their input.

So thank you Chrissie, Rachel, Piers, your extreme comments are a great help…no one takes you seriously.

Nobody can be this wacko. He’s being paid by a radical news outlet to be a radical news analyst. I don’t believe that if he was on CNN, he would be so far to the edge. That being said, he is definitely missing some screws.

Fear and panic on the left right now. It is impossible for people like Mathews to ignore the writing on the wall at this point as it is evident Obama will have to face actual issues and not rely on weekly absurd diversions to change the subject from his failed first term.

I agree, but not as you might think. Paul Ryan is less conservative than Dan Quayle, based purely on voting record. Dan Quayle was the more Reaganesque man on that ticket, and the treatment he got in the media was what, today, would be called Palinized. Go back and read the things Vice President Quayle actually said, and you’ll find a man the Tea Party would have embraced wholeheartedly.

Still, Matthews is an utter tool, and the “worse than Dan Quayle” line only works because there’s nobody to ask that he explain in any detail what that means.

he tries to jumpstart a narrative that choosing Ryan undercuts Romney’s business record specifically. What kind of CEO, after all, would bet his business on such a risky investment?

Hmm, what kind of CEO would hire an accountant to work on a budget even when the accountant didn’t have the CEO experience at running the entire business?

…

Last I checked, pretty much all of them. Knowledge of every aspect of a business generally isn’t a requirement to get hired for a specific job. And given the VP job I expect Ryan to get (accounting/business training speeches for the US to explain what they’re doing) you don’t need a CEO.

It is enjoyable to see the liberal pundits tying themselves into knots over Ryan. Even the traitorous yet unnamed republican establishment is supposedly losing thier minds. Here is my theory as to why. The liberals concentrate in the large urban areas and establishment republicans rarely can see past the District of Columbia borders. Thus they fail to see the masses in fly over country are just looking for someone genuine who will tell them the truth. Ryans populism comes from being one of us, and can propel him to heights of support that the libs/establishment only dream of. The large portion of American that is center right is just looking for answers. Romney/Ryan are at least trying to solve some real problems rather than bloviate. I’m going to watch MSNBC on election day just to see them jumping off cliffs. What Fun!